Looks a lovely fellow

Damian Wereta might be locked up for the next 17 years, but it could have been worse.

The Crown wanted preventive detention — an indefinite term of imprisonment — for the 35-year-old Paremoremo inmate who “shanked” two fellow prisoners.

But this morning Justice Pamela Andrews declined the application, instead jailing Wereta for another 7 years 9 months.

The term will be served on top of the 11 and a half year stint the Black Power member was sentenced to in 2013 for a Dunedin armed robbery and a vicious attack on a group of Corrections officers while on remand.

The father of seven

Remember Labour is proudly campaigning for the rights of people who can’t afford children to have as many as they like!

has an extensive history stretching back to 1997 and features 68 convictions, including an attack on a Crown prosecutor in court.

Sounds like an ideal candidate for preventive detention.

The judge agreed but because the two counts of wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm represented Wereta’s second strike, the 93-month sentence would have to be served in full without the chance of parole.

Excellent. Remember again Labour is vowing to repeal this law.

If the law had been in place earlier he would very likely be on a third strike and that means he would have got 14 years, not seven years nine months.

ross411

hmmokrightitis

And his brother also serving time in max. What a family.

But then, Im almost certain its societies fault, and if we had thrown more money at the problem, it would never have happened.

Back in the real world, there have always been, and will always be scum like this that are a blight on society. Money will make no difference, until they figure out they have to earn what they want, and not just take it.

And a thank you to DG – otherwise, this PoS would be roaming the streets way too soon.

Inandout

Cheap and pathetic political points scoring DPF for the red meat National cheerleaders on this blog –

Remember it is National that has been getting the country into eye watering debt to fund inflation busting increases for beneficiaries whilst it is the Nats more than any other party that have encouraged the Treaty gravy train and the victim mentality it drives.

itstricky

Remember Labour is proudly campaigning for the rights of people who can’t afford children to have as many as they like!

That has to be one of the most ridiculous, and pathetic point scoring comments you have ever made, esp. considering this is a serious crime thread.

The guy is a drop kick, but having seven children isn’t an indicator of that (otherwise we’d deport all Catholics tomorrow) and having seven children is nought to do with Labour, or any other political party, for that matter.

At best, the entire political elite are culpable except that “crazy” Winston Peters or Colin Craig whom a large number on the blog seem to suffer a Peters/Craig derangement syndrome every time their names are mentioned.

Mobile Michael

National campaign ad, 2017:

Labour wants to repeal three strikes. That means armed robber and two time grevious bodily harm convict Damian Wereta will be out of prison in 2020, not 2027. Vote National and keep violent criminals in prison.

sam green

Yip EAD creating a political party to cater to the position of you and your mentor has been suggested many times ‘
We are still waiting.
As the main thrust of your shared politics seem to be against progressives retard..ist could be a good name.
I am sure you will do better than Colon Craig did you might even survive self impalement on your inherent inconsistency’s for longer.

vto

David Farrar “Remember Labour is proudly campaigning for the rights of people who can’t afford children to have as many as they like!”

You’re fucked in the head with a statement like that and its multiple implications. The fact you have even said that is proof complete that our society’s settings are arse-about, and that the right wing is becoming more fascist by the day. You poor shameful man.

FeralScrote

Unity

When they tattoo themselves like this they make themselves virtually unemployable. Would any of you employ this guy even if he wasn’t a thug? He looks an utter creep and sounds as though he is even worse. Perhaps he has mental health issues?!

stigie

Lance

Ha ha ha
The lefties are shitting themselves and shaking their tiny fists of rage at daring to suggest personal responsibility should be exercised by everyone.
Even worse for suggesting that maybe the welfare state should be only a safety net, not a lifestyle… oh the humanity, oh the Nazism, oh it’s the worst thing anyone has ever said in the history of the universe

mikenmild

Sonny Blount

itstricky (2,848 comments) says:
September 18th, 2015 at 7:24 am
The father of seven

Remember Labour is proudly campaigning for the rights of people who can’t afford children to have as many as they like!

That has to be one of the most ridiculous, and pathetic point scoring comments you have ever made, esp. considering this is a serious crime thread.

The guy is a drop kick, but having seven children isn’t an indicator of that (otherwise we’d deport all Catholics tomorrow) and having seven children is nought to do with Labour, or any other political party, for that matter.

Catholics who can’t afford seven children shouldn’t have them either itstricky. Your point fails badly.

Individuals such as this man are very much inbound for political discussion in so much as they are products of the underclass inevitably created by the welfare state. Welfarism is super-effective at destroying families and communities on a wide scale.

Paulus Gnome

Nice to see the Standard commentators here so early with their negative input to life that affects the vast majority of New Zealanders; here until the pages open on the luddite left blogs, sort of like seeing the smelly winos lining up outside the pub that opens first in town . . . .

srylands

“The guy is a drop kick, but having seven children isn’t an indicator of that”
___________________________________________________
Yes it is. Having seven children is not a sufficient indicator of being a drop kick. But it is an indicator.

Harriet

deadrightkev

I agree with your comments above and you have been resoundedly upticked. The National soft cocks on this blog cannot think for themselves.

GD

National can take little credit from three strikes. As I understand it they would have wimped out had you not kept serious pressure up at the time.

Fake Maori like this amoeba are allowed to breed and National supports their breeding program as does Labour. His existance is a result of the ballooning welfare state. There are many more like this cretin on the way. The concern is there are many more that believe they are downtrodden and have a grievance with the past. That is National’s doing directly.

vto

Sonny Blount ” as they are products of the underclass inevitably created by the welfare state. Welfarism is super-effective at destroying families and communities on a wide scale.”

No, it is in fact the opposite. Capitalism and its failings have created the underclass if you think about it. It is capitalism’s inability to provide for all in society that leads to this, not the subsequent support that is required after the failing has materialised.

Logic, it is called, logic. Sheesh. No wonder the right wing never take the lead on new policy and merely always follow slowly to the point the left has previously arrived at. Conservative, slow, right wing thinking has never achieved anything other than acting as slimy shitty ballast.

gump

The worst kind of dog whistle politics.

You constantly peddle the ‘Labour policies are kind to criminals’ crap, but you never mention that Preventive Detention and Extended Supervision Orders were both introduced by Labour Governents in the early 2000s. Isn’t it funny how cheap rhetoric doesn’t match reality?

You’re better than this DPF. I can read the red top tabloids if I want my intelligence insulted.

Odakyu-sen

calendar girl

Sam Green@ 7:36am –

“How much are you paid for this shit commentary DF?”

Nick R was cautioned yesterday for an unparliamentary question. I thought at the time that Nick’s comment was somewhat tongue-in-cheek. This is much worse in my view. You couldn’t offer such an excuse for Sam’s little character assassination effort.

Than

I think he could get work as a bouncer or debt collector, Unity.

God I hope not. Put this guy in a confrontational situation and it would have a high chance of escalating to violence or even bloodshed. Not even the least reputable business would want that kind of trouble.

Unfortunately he sounds like a strong candidate for capital punishment. It’s clear he has no qualms whatever about inflicting severe violence on others, and that’s not going to change. His only means of income is by threatening or intimidating people. He’s a menace that society (including other prisoners and prison staff) should be protected from.

I agree with RRM (7.46am) – David Garrett’s political career may have been brief, but he has left a far greater legacy in Three Strikes than many of those who have supped from the political trough for 20-plus years.

cmm

David Garrett

This guy is actually a relatively typical second striker (from what we are able to glean from media reports, and dogged research by one of our guys) but this is a fairly rare media report..significantly – perhaps – written by a guy who doesn’t like as if he’s 16.

More commonly, sneering commenters like AG, a.k.a. Professor Andrew Geddis, highlight strike offenders like the so called “playground bully” Elijah Whaanga. Although none of Whaanga’s vicious street aggravated robberies were committed in a playground – and he is 23 years old – “playground bully” sounds much gentler and kinder than “vicious street thug” doesn’t it?

This guy is one of a dozen or so second strikers who committed their offence while serving time for the first. It is very likely that one of them will soon become our first third striker…which is actually the ideal situation – bashing or killing one of their own to graduate through the ranks, instead of someone on the street.

But seriously folks, Jacinda Ardern thinks this guy is capable of rehabilitation, and the “draconian” law which means he serves his latest sentence without parole should be repealed. Those of us on planet earth think differently.

vto

Shedakyu above says this; “Rough translation of an old Japanese saying: “Feed stray cats and what do you get? More stray cats.” Discuss in relation to welfare.”

That would apply if people were stray cats.

But I see with great clarity, the thinking of you lot – you are happy for the poor to be not given anything and be left to scrounge around rubbish tips, stealing from the rich neighbour when they can, and sleeping outside at night.

Mr_Blobby

“The judge agreed but because the two counts of wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm represented Wereta’s second strike, the 93-month sentence would have to be served in full without the chance of parole.”

What am I missing here.

Are the 2 counts of wounding not strike 2 and 3???????

Who is this Pamela Andrews, wake up and smell the coffee, 35 and 68 previous convictions.

One would hope that the Parole board will not grant him Parole on his first conviction due to the 2nd conviction being proof positive that he has not been reformed and never will.

But that will not happen. At 45 he will be wondering the streets a danger to the rest of the community. My condolences to the family’s of the next victims.

dime

David Garrett

But on the issue of DPF’s comment about his progeny, which has got our lefties so energized…A moment’s thought would surely tell you that it is sadly very likely that his children – or some of them at least – will follow in his footsteps…not so much because he is a role model – he would never be around them to be much of that – but because of the circumstances in which they were created.

To be blunt, what half decent woman would sleep with that? His “partners” will inevitably have all come from the same sad sorry place he has…the same desparate underclass fostered by welfare…and before you all leap on the term “underclass” lefties, I believe it was Clark or Goff who coined it? It was certainly Clark who referred to “ferals” on the West Coast.

But sadly there probably IS a bit of role modeling going on…we have all felt ourselves swell with pride and pleasure when overhearing our sons praise us to their peers…”My dad can build anything”..”My Dad knows all this stuff without Googling!” “My Dad was on the TV trying to keep a bad guy in jail”

Werata’s sons will say rather different things: “My Dad’s the biggests bad-ass in Pare max bro!” “My Dad smashes any fulla who gets in his fuckin way”; ” My Dad doesnt take no shit from anyone bro, especially the cops”

“Experts” like Geddis will scoff at the above dialogue, and think it’s made up…That’s because they have never even SEEN such men – except in the paper – much less drank or worked with them…the only time the Geddis’ of this world will ever see a tattooed thug smash a glass on a pool table and shove it in someone’s face is at the movies…and lucky them. The first time I saw it I literally shat myself.

Mr Blobby: No…you can only advance through the strike ranks one “offending episode” at a time…so if you knife two people in street fight and one of them dies, you will be convicted of two separate charges (GBH and murder or manslaughter) but only get one strike…that was one of the several concessions we had to make to get the Nats to support it.

And as I say, it is more likely than not that he will lose control again, sooner rather than later, and knife someone in jail. That will keep him there on third strike..if its manslaughter, that’s him done…LWOP

dime

“No, it is in fact the opposite. Capitalism and its failings have created the underclass if you think about it. It is capitalism’s inability to provide for all in society that leads to this, not the subsequent support that is required after the failing has materialised.”

David Garrett

isnt it sad that SST is going to have to tap its weary donors – who give 10 and 20 dollars by and large – to mount a “Willie Horton” type campaign at the next election using guys like this to put people off Labour…The Nats are no damn good – after initially gleefully claiming 3S as their own, they now appear to be somewhat embarrassed by it.

The current Justice Minister – having been staunchly “one of us” as a back bencher – is now into touchy feely theories which basically start from the premise that everyone is capable of rehabilitation. The sad reality is different, as anyone who has been around the criminal justice system for a while – and is not led by ideology – knows only too well.

David Garrett

Mr blobby: Yes, you can indeed get two murders for the price of one…but to be fair, this has long been our legal system, even when we had capital punishment – you can only be hanged once.

The yanks of course have the right idea: in non CP states they will impose CONSECUTIVE life sentences for double or triple murder…the aim of course being that regardless of amnesties and pardons, such a person never again sees outside a prison.

Capital punishment for the third strike no appeal no fucking around straight out the back of court and executed.
Saying daddy was executed doesn’t have the same street creed as daddy is in d block.
It also removes their negative influence in their gangs and the prison population at large.

gump

Sixteen downvotes and no rebuttal to my post…

That’s because it is a fact that Labour introduced open ended sentences of Preventive Detention via the Sentencing Act 2002, and post release Extended Supervision Orders via the Parole Amendment Act 2004. These are the highest level of sentencing available in our justice system – and yet Labour is somehow soft on crime?

Not everything that Labour did is bad. Not everything that National does is good. Please stop treating politics like a simplistic and partisan team sport – it only makes you look stupid.

Than

gump, the rebuttal would be that Labour twelve years ago is not necessarily the same as Labour today. It’s currently Labour’s policy to repeal 3 strikes, so at least in that specific sense they are indeed “soft on crime”.

Northland Wahine

Why do the Latte left and the Chardonnay communists continue to defend and support the likes of this?

Because he does not feature in their lives. He’s never going to fix their car, serve them at their local cafe, nor will they share a seminar at a Winz office, sit next to them in reception. His ilk will immediately be questioned in their neighbourhoods. He will remain a conversation over sushi.

David Garrett

gump: You miss the point Sir…”on so many levels” as the lefties like to say.

firstly the “scheme” (as we say in the trade) of the Sentencing Act 2002 is essentially a direction to Judges that: “You must impose the least restrictive sentence you can possibly impose” The scheme of its twin, the Parole Act 2002, is: “You must let them out as soon as possible”…only one sub-section – s.7 (1) – adds the caveat “consistent with public safety”. And that sub section was only inserted after a struggle.

Secondly, Labour never “got” that the Judges – even without their help – are inherently liberal, and soft…because, as I said above regarding Geddis, they simply cannot conceive of evil fundamentally fucked people being in our midst…they have never mixed with them; they dont want to believe it.

For all of those reasons, 3S was necessary, and Labour wants to repeal it…Ask them for examples – and I have – of where how and with whom the law has led to unjust outcomes, and there is a deafening silence. They dont *need* unjust outcomes to want it gone…that it conflicts with their ideology is reason enough.

Paulus Gnome

gump

@David Garrett

I’m not a lefty and I support 3S in its current format. I actually think you did an excellent job – it is very clear that you learned from the mistakes made in other parts of the world and crafted a remarkably balanced law.

It would be a mistake for Labour to repeal the 3S law. My complaint relates to the broader picture. It grinds my gears when people simplify and misrepresent the policies of their opponents.

In the interests of discussion – if the Sentencing Act is so flawed in its conception, why has there been no attempt to reform it? National have been in power now for seven years so they presumably support the legislation in its current form?

David Garrett

gump: Good question…the answer, I think, is this: what Stephen Franks has called a “happy accident” where several things coincided: ACT having some leverage over the Nats; Judith Collins and me both being in at the same time…that led (once Power had been blown off) to a real world solution – 3S without frills (like a three year qualifying sentence) but with – because we had no option – no respectivity and the “manifestly unjust” out for soft Judges…

laworder

First let me start by thanking David Garrett as many others have.

This thing is the perfect casebook demonstration of perhaps the core problem in the justice system and wider society -that is the fact that those convicted of serious violent/sexual offences have the same rights as law-abiding citizens and worse, their victims and/or victim’s families. This Government however is not at fault, although they have done nothing to remedy it either. Ultimately, we need to review the assumptions that underpin not only our “justice” system but society in general, so that those who show no respect for the basic human rights of the vulnerable, the poor and more or less law abiding citizens in general forfeit rights in proportion to the extent of the consequences of their actions.

Bob R has also made a very good point – Aggressive/antisocial male behavior is moderately to highly heritable. Considerable research is now providing further support for what Bob R has said. Rehabilitation for offenders like this is wishful thinking, it just isnt going to happen

Reid

Secondly, Labour never “got” that the Judges – even without their help – are inherently liberal, and soft…because, as I said above regarding Geddis, they simply cannot conceive of evil fundamentally fucked people being in our midst…they have never mixed with them; they dont want to believe it.

If that’s really why they are like that, then they’re not qualified to be a judge because reaching that conclusion because of that lack of experience demonstrates the subject who does that is manifestly unqualified to judge their way out of a paper bag, let alone anything important.

I’m not saying you’re wrong David, I’m saying if you’re right, then it explains a hell of a lot, but in an appalling kind of way.